Current data communication systems rarely approach highest possible rate, i.e., the rate corresponding to Shannon channel capacity. For example, voiceband modems complying with ITU-T recommendation V.90 employ uncoded modulation for downstream transmission. The nominal downstream rate of 56 kbit/s is thereby almost never achieved, although under practical channel conditions the capacity rate can exceed 56 kbit/s.
The difference between the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) required to accomplish a given rate with a given practical coding and modulation scheme and the SNR at which an ideal capacity-achieving scheme could operate at the same rate is known as “SNR gap to capacity”. At spectral efficiencies of 3 bit per signal dimension or higher, uncoded modulation with equiprobable PAM (pulse amplitude modulation) and QAM (quadrature amplitude modulation) symbols exhibit an SNR gap of 9 dB at a symbol error probability of 10−6. In the case of V.90 downstream transmission, the SNR gap can correspond to a rate loss of up to 12 kbit/s.
This overall 9 dB gap is generally comprised of a “shaping gap” portion and a “coding gap” portion. The “shaping gap” portion (approximately 1.5 dB) is caused by the absence of constellation shaping (towards a Gaussian distribution). The remaining “coding gap” portion (approximately 7.5 dB) stems from the lack of sequence coding to increase signal distances between permitted symbol sequences.
Two different techniques are used, generally in combination, to reduce the overall 9 dB gap. The first technique addresses the “coding gap” portion, and uses one of several coding techniques to achieve coding gains. One of these techniques is trellis-coded modulation. More recent techniques employ serial- or parallel-concatenated codes and iterative decoding (Turbo coding). These latter techniques can reduce the coding gap by about 6.5 dB, from 7.5 dB to about 1 dB.
Once a coding gain is achieved, the second technique, referred to as shaping, can be used to achieve an even further gain. This type of gain is generally referred to as a shaping gain. Theoretically, shaping is capable of providing an improvement (i.e., shaping gain) of up to 1.53 dB.
Two practical shaping techniques have been employed in the prior art to achieve shaping gains, namely, trellis shaping and shell mapping. With 16-dimensional shell mapping, such as employed in V.34 modems, for example, a shaping gain of about 0.8 dB can be attained. Trellis shaping can provide a shaping gain of about 1 dB at affordable complexity. Accordingly, between 0.5 and 0.7 dB of possible shaping gain remains untapped by these prior art shaping methods.
Further limitations and disadvantages of conventional and traditional approaches will become apparent to one of skill in the art, through comparison of such systems with the present invention as set forth in the remainder of the present application with reference to the drawings.